A D HYDRO POWER LTD Vs. JUGLU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant petition filed under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 22.8.2017, passed by the learned District Judge, Kullu, District Kullu, H.P, whereby two separate applications filed by the parties to the lis came to be disposed of by a common judgment, petitioner-applicant (hereinafter referred to as "the applicant"), being aggrieved and dissatisfied with passing of order dated 30.5.2014, passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner, Kullu, on the application having been made by the respondent herein, seeking therein compensation to the tune of Rs. 8 lac, on account of damage to his house and property by the applicant while laying transmission line, preferred a petition under Sec. 16 (3) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 199 (in short "the Act"), in the court of learned District Judge. Similarly, respondent who had earlier filed petition before the Deputy Commissioner, Kullu, and was awarded sum of Rs. 4 lac on account of damages caused to his house and property by the applicant while laying transmission line also approached the District Judge Kullu, District Kullu, under Sec. 16 (3) of the Act, praying therein for enhancement of compensation. Learned District Judge vide common judgment dated 22.8.2017, dismissed both the applications having been filed by the applicant as well as respondent and as a consequence thereof, order dated 30.5.2014, passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner, Kullu, H.P., came to be upheld. In the aforesaid background, applicant has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein to set-aside impugned order passed by the learned District Judge as well as Deputy Commissioner, being passed without jurisdiction.

(2.) Having heard parties and perused material available on record vis-visreasoning recorded in the impugned orders referred herein above, this Court is persuaded to agree with the contention of Ms. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, learned Senior counsel representing the applicant that Deputy Commissioner, Kullu, had no authority whatsoever to award compensation, if any, to the respondent on account of damage to the house and property by the applicant while erecting towers and laying transmission line, while exercising power under Sec. 16 (3) of the Act.

(3.) It would be apt to reproduce Sec. 10 of the Act, which reads as under: